But that is what Hayes darkly hints at and what many Conservatives want, perhaps by chopping further at the subsidies wind farms receive. If, backed by David Cameron and George Osborne, Hayes prevails then the energy minister who also claimed to be "the peoples' minister" will have betrayed them. Opinion polls have shown time after time that the public overwhelmingly supports wind power, even when close to their homes. They understand that the real threat to our green and pleasant land comes from climate change and the ever weirder weather it brings: the floods that devastated middle England in 2000 were made three times more likely by global warming.

Hayes has also betrayed energy bill payers at a time when bills are soaring so high that the Prime minister felt forced to invent new policy on the hoof. Here are the facts. Clean energy is not optional, either because of legally binding carbon targets or practical energy security concerns, and onshore wind is the cheapest form of low-carbon energy. It costs about the same as gas – without the greenhouse gases. Rejecting onshore wind farms means pushing up homeowners' energy bills because that lost energy must be replaced by more expensive alternatives, such as offshore wind farms that cost not far off double. This is not, as Hayes stupidly describes it, "a bourgeois left article of faith based on some academic perspective."

However Hayes does raise one important and real problem: "We can no longer have wind turbines imposed on communities." The one genuine objection to wind farms is that you don't like the look of them. But people faced with turbines built by vast, faceless energy companies who import the hardware to their backyard and then export all the benefits understandably feel invaded. When the turbines are community owned, or local people at least benefit, that sense of violation vanishes. The wind farm at Fintry in Scotland demonstrates this, as does Germany, where over 60% of renewable energy is community owned and opposition to wind farms barely exists. In the UK, community ownership is well under 10%.

A consultation on wind power now under way gives Hayes two edges to the sword he is waving at the turbines. First, it will examine how to correct two decades of failure to promote community ownership. This is where the real solution to the wind war lies. But second, it will examine – yet again – whether the subsidies all new technologies need to break the grip of incumbents could be cut further for wind power. Subsidies do indeed taper down over time – unless they are for nuclear power – but there is clear evidence that further cuts now would be needlessly damaging.

That evidence already forced Cameron and Osborne to back down from a earlier attempt to slash wind subsidies this summer. So Hayes appears to have been tasked with finding different evidence. He certainly appears to be able to hold two conflicting thoughts in his head at the same time. Yesterday, as he threw the future of wind farms into doubt, he was also telling a renewables industry conference that he recognised the "need for sufficient certainty to invest in the future."

In the end it will come down to a battle within the coalition to choose between two polls. Will it act on the wishes of the whole British people, repeatedly expressed in opinion polls. Or will the poll that is prioritised be the general election ballot box in those Conservative marginal seats where an ill wind blows?